California Case Summaries

Civil Procedure

Secondary practice area

4th District Court of Appeal, Civil Procedure, Litigation, Real Estate Law

Diplomat Property Manager, LLC v. FortiFi Financial, Inc. — Recording PACE Liens Is Not Protected Anti-SLAPP Activity, and Fraud Claims Do Not Arise from Later Receivership Litigation

The Court of Appeal affirmed the denial of FortiFi's anti-SLAPP motion, holding that recording PACE assessment liens is not protected prelitigation activity and that Diplomat's fraud-based claims do not arise from FortiFi's later litigation conduct in a receivership action.

4th District Court of Appeal, Civil Procedure, Personal Injury & Tort

John Doe N.K. v. Palm Springs Unified School District — School District Not Liable for 1978 Teacher Abuse Where No Supervisor Knew or Should Have Known of the Danger

The Court of Appeal affirmed summary judgment for a school district on negligent hiring, supervision and retention claims over a teacher's 1978–1979 sexual abuse of a student, holding that the plaintiff offered no evidence that district supervisors knew or should have known of the danger and that the district's lack of 40-year-old records did not create a triable issue.

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, Civil Procedure, Criminal Law, Litigation

United States v. Mumma — Ninth Circuit affirms conviction and forfeiture for hidden-camera exploitation of a minor but vacates restitution over a $2,500 error

The Ninth Circuit upheld the indictment and a $160,000 forfeiture money judgment against Todd Mumma, holding any Rule 32.2 jury-inquiry error harmless, but vacated the restitution order and remanded to correct a $2,500 arithmetic error.

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, Civil Procedure, Labor & Employment Law, Litigation

Whitfield v. Mullin — Ninth Circuit Denies En Banc Rehearing, Leaving Its “Serious Questions” Injunction Test in Place Over Ten Dissenting Votes

The Ninth Circuit denied rehearing en banc in a Rehabilitation Act case, leaving in place a panel remand that invokes the circuit's "serious questions" sliding-scale injunction test, while ten judges dissented on the ground that the test conflicts with Winter and Starbucks.

Scroll to Top